“The Supreme Court really let us down. No Wisdom, No Courage!” Trump wrote in a statement on Twitter following the top court’s ruling.
“So, you’re the President of the United States, and you just went through an election where you got more votes than any sitting President in history, by far – and purportedly lost,” he continued.
“You can’t get ‘standing’ before the Supreme Court, so you ‘intervene’ with wonderful states that, after careful study and consideration, think you got ‘screwed’, something which will hurt them also. Many others likewise join the suit but, within a flash, it is thrown out and gone, without even looking at the many reasons it was brought. A Rigged Election, fight on!”
Earlier that evening, the nation’s top court handed down an order that disappointed many Americans who were hoping that the justices would shed some light on the ongoing dispute over the integrity of the 2020 election.
The court opined that Texas did not have the legal standing—or right—to sue under the Constitution because it has not shown a valid interest to intervene in how other states handle their elections.
“Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections,” the order (pdf) read. “All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.”
Justice Samuel Alito issued a separate statement to say he would have granted Texas’s request to sue, but not the preliminary injunction, as he believes the Supreme Court is obligated to take up any case that falls within its “original jurisdiction,” meaning the court has the power to hear a case for the first time as opposed to reviewing a lower court’s decision. Justice Clarence Thomas joined Alito in his statement.
“In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. … I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue,” Alito wrote in his statement. He did not address the questions in the case.
Trump and his allies had pinned high expectations on the Texas lawsuit, with the president characterizing the case as “the big one.” He had asked the Supreme Court to allow him to join the case as an intervening party.
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who is leading the Trump campaign’s legal efforts, told Newsmax that he thought the court’s decision to reject the case was a “terrible mistake.”
“The worst part of this is, basically, the court is saying, we want to stay out of this and … they don’t want to give them a hearing, they don’t want the American people to hear the facts,” Giuliani said.
Giuliani said he had spoken to the president following the ruling, who told the former mayor to consider alternate options.
Giuliani added that since the court rejected the case based on legal standing, the president and some of the electors could bring other cases in the district courts, alleging the same facts.
“There is nothing that prevents us from filing these cases immediately in the district court, in which the President of course would have standing. Some of the electors would have standing,” Giuliani said.
Ellis, a Trump campaign senior legal adviser, told Newsmax she believes the team still has time to challenge the results, adding that Jan. 6 is when Congress officially counts the Electoral College votes.
“That date in January. That’s the date of ultimate significance. And the Supreme Court has recognized that,” she said. “We still have time, the state legislatures still have time to do the right thing. They can inquire, they can hold hearings, they can reclaim their delegates, and they should and I hope that now all of the evidence we have brought forth in these hearings will give them the inspiration and courage that they need to act.”
Texas’s case centers around allegations that Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin changed election rules in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Electors Clause, treated voters unequally, and caused voting irregularities by relaxing ballot-integrity protections under state law, opening up the potential for voting fraud.
Several attorneys general from the defendant states issued a statement welcoming the news.
The president has a number of ongoing legal challenges in state and federal courts, some of which are making their way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Several lawsuits filed by third parties and attorney Sidney Powell are also proceeding through the judicial system.
Mimi Nguyen-Ly contributed to this report.